U.S. Senate
See Full Big Line
(D) J. Hickenlooper*
(R) Somebody
80%
20%
Governor
See Full Big Line
(D) Phil Weiser
(D) Joe Neguse
(D) Jena Griswold
60%
60%
40%↓
Att. General
See Full Big Line
(D) M. Dougherty
(D) Alexis King
(D) Brian Mason
40%
40%
30%
Sec. of State
See Full Big Line
(D) A. Gonzalez
(D) George Stern
(R) Sheri Davis
50%↑
40%
30%
State Treasurer
See Full Big Line
(D) Brianna Titone
(R) Kevin Grantham
(D) Jerry DiTullio
60%
30%
20%
CO-01 (Denver)
See Full Big Line
(D) Diana DeGette*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-02 (Boulder-ish)
See Full Big Line
(D) Joe Neguse*
(R) Somebody
90%
2%
CO-03 (West & Southern CO)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Hurd*
(D) Somebody
80%
40%
CO-04 (Northeast-ish Colorado)
See Full Big Line
(R) Lauren Boebert*
(D) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-05 (Colorado Springs)
See Full Big Line
(R) Jeff Crank*
(D) Somebody
80%
20%
CO-06 (Aurora)
See Full Big Line
(D) Jason Crow*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-07 (Jefferson County)
See Full Big Line
(D) B. Pettersen*
(R) Somebody
90%
10%
CO-08 (Northern Colo.)
See Full Big Line
(R) Gabe Evans*
(D) Yadira Caraveo
(D) Joe Salazar
50%
40%
40%
State Senate Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
80%
20%
State House Majority
See Full Big Line
DEMOCRATS
REPUBLICANS
95%
5%
June 02, 2007 06:59 PM UTC
43 Comments
This could get messy. Let’s hope that one of these folks raises a couple hundred thousand more than the rest and that is that. Please keep this whole primary thing civil. Dems are finally making some progress in the 4th and this could really screw it all up.
The primary contest should show us who can campaign best. And if it gets a little dirty – well that will be nothing compared to what MM will throw at them.
In addition to demonstrating electability, they raise the profile of the eventual candidate.
Sometimes the charges raised in primaries hurt the candidate, but it is hard to know if it would have happened anyway. The classic example, of course, is Gene Nichol calling Strickland a “lawyer lobbyist.” But perhaps a better candidate could have shrugged it off.
It’s pure speculation but the Wad Man just might have come up with it.
Democratic primaries have a history of electing the most unelectable candidate possible, case in point Kerry, Mondale, etc. I’m sure this one will be no different.
Can CD-4 Dems afford sentimentality? This is a 41-R district, so the argument that a primary here will yield a nominee in a strong position to defeat Musgrave is far-fetched.
We need to ask ourselves: Who is the strongest congressional-level candidate in the best position to knock off Musgrave? Everything else is wishful thinking.
I think Angie is probably in the best position right now, because of her name recognition. Brandon would be a strong second because of his military background, he’s a good guy, and because he has actually run for and won office before.
and Musty only got 46% last Nov. That means almost every unaffiliated voter in the district must have voted for Angie or Eidness! (And I suspect that Eidness peeled off quite a few RINOs who couldn’t stomach Musgrave.)
but some of Eidness’ 11% were RINOs who may have been willing to vote for him as a petition or Reform Party candidate, but may have trouble voting for him as a Dem.
When we Dems have had real primaries we have tended to get strong winners like Clinton.
Kerry and Mondale were both the one that we were supposed to accept early on so they could concentrate on the general election. I would say both are a good argument for a truly competitive primary.
03 in IA was VERY competitive with 10 candidates spending at the time records sums of money. The irony of it was that IA democrats thought they were picking the most electable candidate it just goes to show how out of touch they are and the need to change the system.
you know Salazar wouldn’t do something that hasty!
Is there any precedent in history for a contested Democratic primary in C.D. 4? Will the candidates have any idea how to behave themselves?
They’re boldly going where no Democrat has gone before…..
What happened in CD-7 last cycle with that Democratic primary was seen by some as a test case because in future races where Dems might have hope of winning might have a crowded primary field. In a way, I take it as a good sign that Dems feel they have a legitimate chance in CD-4. I just hope the Dems can hold this together.
I am Eric Eidsness and I too am considering a run at the Democratic nomination for CD-4. As a party outsider (no political activism in my history until last year’s Congressional race), and an independent thinker, I will earn the nomination by the hard way by talking directly to the electorate.
Past and present Democratic Party insiders have pledged their support to one of their own. Betsy Markey is well known in Fort Collins and will make a fine contender and I know she will run an issues oriented, civil campaign as did I in last year’s election bid.
When things are going well and all is right with the world, promoting from within is pretty common. Otherwise, looking beyond the bounds of party activists and employees may be called for to find citizens with fresh perspectives, new ideas and a strong connection to the common man. That would be Eric Eidsness, maybe others. The process of applying for the job will tell.
I know that Betsy and I (assuming I announce later this summer) will keep the eye on the ball, which is, defeating Marilyn Musgrave. With only 6% more votes from the Eastern Plains in any of the last three election cycles, a Democrat would have been occupying the CD-4 seat.
Last year, I earned 11.3% of the vote (27,000 votes) and the endorsement of most of the major papers in the CD-4 including the Coloradoan. Everyone who voted saw the name “Eric Eidsness” on the ballot last year.
There is new evidence that strongly suggests that I took more votes away from MM and earned support across the political spectrum in both the urban and rural areas of CD-4. I will work hard to motivate my supporters in the last race to follow me to victory in 2008. So, if I can earn the trust and support of the Democratic party, the numbers are going my way.
The electoral process is how we choose our candidates to run for office in the November 2008 General Election. I will work hard to allay concerns of those Democrats who have chosen party activism or professional politics as a lifestyle, without whom we wouldn’t have candidates. So thank you. But, I will also talk to the common man and woman across the CD-4.
I look forward to standing shoulder to shoulder with all contenders (if I announce) at various forums so the public can gauge which candidate they think best fits the skills, attributes and experience to truly represent all citizens in the 4th District.
Eric Eidsness
Mr. Eidsness,
Thank you for stepping up to the plate and being a voice of reason in the Democratic Party. We need more independent voices just like yourself!
You are far and away the most qualified candidate to replace Musgrave.
Should you run and prevail in the primary I’ll send some cash your way. (Not being a registered Dem or a CD4 resident, I’m not going to donate to anyone for the primary.)
This was a good post – content and phrasing. Great improvement.
If you win the primary you will have a donation from me – I live in CO-2.
What “evidence” are your referring to?
So you thought you’d slap on a fresh coat of paint and run the old campaign as a Democrat this time?
You give politicians a bad name, sir.
Earlier on ColoradoPols a blogger referred to the Poll commissioned by the DCCC which formed the basis of Brandon Shaffer’s (Longmont) assertion in the Fort Collins Coloradoan breaking news story a week ago that Shaffer had announced an exploratory committee for CD-4. Brandon was quoted as saying that polls showed him beating MM and for the good of the party Angie should step aside.
Reportedly, the poll asked the question in effect, “if there were a head to head race between MM and AP, who would you vote for. The results reportedly were MM up 5% and AP up 1%.
I am trying to find this poll.
The Democratic establishment probably does not want an independent minded populist to get the upper hand on its party faithful, at least early on in the race. It is understandable that they are more “comfortable” with one of their own.
Currently, Betsy Markey is getting the early endorsements from Larimer County based past and present Democratic office holders. That is fine and their right. I have to earn the nomination, which means I have to earn my stripes with the Democratic leaders.
My running for Congress in 2006 had nothing to do with partisan politics – that should have been clear enough. Like so many Americans, I spend most of my life raising my children, holding down a job, paying my bills, and helping my neighbors and community. It wasn’t until 9/11 when I was in Mid-town Manhattan that I (and the rest of America) began to awaken from our sleep about the condition of the nation and the world and our place in it.
As I heard the intemperate imperialistic rhetoric coming from the Bush Administration which played on our fears and national pride, and my son, then 19 years old, joined the Marine Corps, I began to speak out against a preemptive invasion – I could not believe that again in my lifetime I would witness another usurpation (indeed, Congressional ceding) of the peoples power over war (Article I, Section 8 of the U.S. Constitution)and another Vietnam in the making.
Over two years ago, I began to complain to friends about how Americans were behaving like a pack of lemmings running off the cliff because of runaway debt, loss of Constitutional protections for average Americans, record growth of the size and intrusiveness of government, broken health care, and loss of stature in the world, no immigration enforcement, etc. – I finally decided to get off my bony ass and as a citizen who understood government policy and enforcement, the free market system, world affairs and who was a combat veteran, I decided to do something about it and run for office.
I truly understand the disappointment of those Democrats who worked so hard for Angie Paccione. I come from a different place, not from political activism in any party whatsoever.
My goal was not to just beat Marilyn Musgrave who does not represent me or my family, but to replace her with a responsible, mature adult who is uncommonly qualified to take national office at this time in our history.
I ran on issues, vision and refreshing and new ideas. I am planning to do so again in the Democratic Party because there is not any daylight between the “New” Democratic Party and my positions and public record on fiscal conservatism, social issues, fairness and the courage of my convictions to stand on principle – like take Congress’ war powers back and force the President to develop a plan that withdraws America from combat operations in Iraq but also deals with the problem we have created on the ground through regional diplomacy, etc.
Democrats should be looking at which candidate can beat MM in the general election. Look at my background (water, business, environment, military, federal government policy-making, international) and make an objective evaluation of my credentials and posted positions (www.eric4congress.org), and compare me with others who may be running for the Democratic nomination.
Otherwise, just complain like I used to do and howl at the wind.
Eric Eidsness
P.S. There will be a forum at the Larimer Co Dem Party HQ on Mason Street, Fort Collins, at 7PM on Thursday, June 7th – a chance for a conversation with Eric Eidsness. Please attend but lets check the past at the door and look ahead. I will be candid, I always am.
An anonymous comment on a blog?
Oh my . . . .
That’ll sell.
Aren’t you in the least bit interested in the poll results commissioned by the DCCC? Branden Shaffer claimed that if he ran against MM, he would beat her by 17 points and that Angie would lose – thus his admonition in the Coloradoan that Angie should step aside for the good of the party.
The results must have shown Angie losing for him to assert this claim. The question is how much? On a common sense basis, with a poll taken without my name in it, which I have heard from reliable sources was the case (in fact, I emailed the Western Political Coordinator for the DCCC asking them how they could get realistic results without including me in an head to head race with MM), then the poll results will speak to Angie’s strength as a candidate without my participation.
There was a poll – the question is who has it and will the DCCC release it? If not, why not, since their mission is to help get Democratic congressional candidates elected.
Look, this “poll” was of likely voters in a presidential election year, so even if FunInCO isn’t totally full of it (what are the odds?) it has nothing to do with the mid-term Nov. ’06 election because the sample is totally different. Plus, the poll was six months after the Nov. election, which means it has no statistical bearing on what happened in Nov.
The point is: your “evidence” amounts to grasping at straws, based on an anonymous comment on a blog. It’s just not realistic.
Aren’t we the least intellectually curious as to what the poll says? Who knows.
It should help chart the course for the future, should it not?
I appreciate your observations but I make no apology for my Constitutional right to run for Congress, past or future, nor my belief in myself and my ability to represent all citizens of the CD-4 and that through my life’s experiences I understand what it means to take the Constitutional Oath that affirms “that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter, so help me God”.
EE
I’m always curious what polls say, but isn’t that a different subject? And nobody has questioned your right to run. What’s that about?
The question here is about your sales pitch — and somehow I don’t feel the need to invoke the Constitution to raise that question.
So if a poll shows you are a weak candidate who doesn’t stand a chance, will you still run?
Early in the process of my deciding to run for Congress last year, I was interviewing self-proclaimed “political strategists”, who, said I should do a poll before I decided to run (apparently he wanted to be sure I could win so he would be backing a “winner”).
I realized then that this fellow just does not get people like me since there are so few adults my age and experience (which includes no political activism) who don’t need the income and aren’t interested in making political office a career, and who would give up their privacy and throw themselves on the sword of public opinion for something they believe in.
The electoral process will sift out the best candidate. It hasn’t even begun.
I wonder why the DCCC didn’t include me in their poll? Could it be that the power brokers were at work – the ones who decide for all voters who they get to choose from in the general election – which may be why we have such a miserable participation rate in our elections compared with, say Australia, France and England – all democracies.
Signing off for today, you get the last word.
EE
I think I made my point anyway, so I don’t need to have “the last word.” However, I am now even more skeptical about you than I was before. If someone is clearly obsessing about polling, then turns around and rationalizes away how polling doesn’t matter, that person doesn’t strike me as a serious person.
The reason Brandon did so well in the DCCC poll was because he was a fresh face. The people of CD-4 are sick of both Angie and Musgrave. Last election was close, but it was so negative that everyone involved was hurt.
As to why you weren’t included in the poll my guess that they figured you don’t have a snowballs chance in hell of winning. Nothing personal but third party candidates numbers drop significantly their 2nd around and people are even less supportive of people who switch parties.
is one thing, but flipping parties after a few months just doesn’t pass the smell test. I’m sure you have totally valid reasons to do it just raises eyebrows with joe public.
Good, succinct answer and the brutal truth as to why Dems are jumping on board with his campaign. The guy has been in three parties in less than one calender year.
There’s more to being a Democrat than registering as one. I smell ego, not an interest in promoting and developing progressive values.
I know a ton of Dems, ordinary Dems, not insiders, that would refuse to vote before they cast one for Eidsness.
I will take at face value that you are who you say you are. With that said, werent you a republican, then reform, now dem? I think, and could be completely wrong on this issue, that Webb was a rep who became a dem with no layover in independant land, no?
Webb had a lot of things going his way the least of which was his air of “the republican party left me, not vice versa,” which I hope I am not alone in inferring.
I’ll be upfront in my support, verbal only because I am poor, of Angie, and say that it seems presumptuously opportunistic of you, as well as a little egotistical, to think you will be able to somehow win the dem nod after running as reform only two years before.
I can not agree with mountian man without empirical proof, but I imagine that few have made the leap from obscure third party to major party and so any evidence would be appreciated.
I am not a political player, like most Americans. My appeal will not be to some of you who blog on this site because I do not meet your smell test.
I would hope that people would not pre-judge and first get a sense of what is in my heart as a candidate. Jim, with whom I served, had his reasons and I say that becaues he defied convention and won, he is a hero to the Democratic insiders.
If you don’t want to dig deeper in who I am and what I stand for, fine. Support the other guy. That is our system. Perhaps you should run if you feel so strongly about our political system.
Cheers.
I can only speak for myself, but I am certainly going to check out your positions as well as your competitors. I do so because I am a total political junkie and genuinely curious about what other people think.
Also, I dont live in CD-4. Sadly, I live in CD-6 so I have to live vicariously through other districts. For me to run would be a quixotic endeavour. I know you wrote that facetiously, but I wanted to respond anyway.
I commend anyone who wants to run, but I am curious why you have switched parties so frequently so recently?
“but I am curious why you have switched parties so frequently so recently?”
I hope EE answers this one.
It is rare that I get to have a back and forth with a candidate or an actual politician so when I do I like to ask the questions that I am curious about. I am open to any explanation he offers.
That is a fair question. Short answer, the Republican Party had abandoned its principles of government that protected individual rights and privacy and fiscal responsibility which were my two issues and left me – I said so at the Windsor Debate on October 24th and I changed party to the Colorado Reform Party in early 2006 because it was too late to run as an independent under Secretary of State Rules and the Democratic nomination was sewed up. The Reform Party was dead and I revived it, which is why I didn’t know if I would be on the November ballot until the first week of June 2006.
During the last week of the campaign, I received a book in the mail from Ron Rapoport called “Three’s a Crowd” in which he wrote in long hand, “To Eric Eidsness who represents what this book is all about”.
I was unable to read this book until after the November 7th election when sitting on a beach in Australia in early December. The essence of the book was that third party candidates play a vital role in American political discourse. They emerge on the American political scene and represent a constituency, policies or a point of view that the two mainstream parties have left out.
The irony is that according to Rapoport’s analysis, the response of the major parties is to shift their message or policies to capture those who followed the third party candidate. Also, the better the third party candidate did in the polls in the first place, the less likely he would do as well the next time around because of the shift made by the major party candidates (I testified thus before at the State Capital at John Kafalas’ request in support of his initiative on “alternative voting methods”).
(You might want to look at the how the next race will be issues oriented and more civil which is the ground I carved out in the 2006 elections – thus affirming Rapoport’s analysis).
Immediately after the Windsor H.S. debate on October 24th, many Democrats approached me and complimented me on my performance. After the race and after my return from the South Pacific other Democrats approached me and asked that I run again, and on a Democratic ticket. The immediate past Chair of the Weld County Democratic Party said after reading my issues on my web site (www.eric4congress.org), that “Me and my friends don’t know why you haven’t been a Democrat all along!”
There is not any daylight between my position on fiscal responsibility, Iraq, energy, and social issues and the New Democratic Party of the 110th Congress.
Also, Rapoport’s books shows that I am in a very small group of people running for public office in the past 30 years that did better than 7% ( I got 11.3% of the vote and the endorsement of most of the major CD-4 newspapers). With the feedback I am getting from Democrats across the CD-4, it just made sense for me to change to a Democrat and try to earn the support of the party during the primary season which is what I am doing.
Prior to the 2006 election season, I have not been politically active in any regard (except as a Veteran for Kerry).
The EPA job pretty much found me and I left Washington D.C. in 2003 wiser, bruised, a pariah in my engineering field and pretty turned off by our political system. I was sandwiched between an angry Democratic congress carrying out its oversight powers, and an administration that didn’t help and got in the way, then came down from the mountaintop and shot their own wounded.
I am very typical of the average voter who goes to the polls in general elections. I am not a party insider or a political junkie. The Party insiders are the Gatekeepers to the nomination process. That is the system and good for them for participating.
I am also typical of many Americans who didn’t choose a party early in their lives (at the voting age of 21) on any other basis than what their parent’s affiliation.
For these reasons, my history and experiences, I come from a very populist place with a populist message and is the single reason that if I was nominated by the Democratic Party for CD-4 in 2008, I would defeat MM.
Eric,
I question neither your motive nor your policy positions, I respect your motives and agree with many of your views. However, your statement that you had little involvement in politics before 2006 reveals the problem with your campaign.
For a D to win in the CD4, even against the ineffectual MM, will require 3 things: one, a good candidate (I assume you are–you did well enough as reform, two a good air game (money–to drive tv), and three a great ground game (organization– for GOTV, mailing, response, events, etc.)
Unfortunately these are facts of life and having all three bases covered is necessary to blunt the built in advantages of the Rs in the CD4.
Brandon has now withdrawn so I will not comment on him other than to say he is exceptionally smart and looked good on paper.
I respect Angie, but IMO her campaign was ammatuerish and only your peeling off the RINO’s made it close. Angie did well in Larimer county, but if you look at the internals Matsunaka did better in ’04 most everywhere else. I think she deserves another shot, but she has to improve her game.
You debated well and got a lot of impressive editorial endorsements, but you lake both the fund raising to generate an air game not the infrastructure to run a ground game.
I don’t know Betsy other than by reputation–which is quite good. She is well conected within the party and should be able to raise money. Her biggest advantage is her built in ground game–here she really knows what she is doing. She hasn’t run for office before and that will hurt her, but neither had Cary Kennedy before the Treasurer race, so its not a bar to winning.
I welcome you as a new democrat to the party, we can always use more fiscally conservative people who believe in liberty into the party. I hope the party doesn’t punish you for wrongly believing that you cost Angie the election–you put it within striking range–but winning, a primary in particular, is about building relationships and I am not convinced you have done that, or can do it in the next year. I wish you luck.
Danny:
I think that was the best/most accurate comment I’ve seen on this subject. Do you write your own blog or publish anywhere?
Well said, Danny, and thank you for your evenhandedness.
Something to consider: the race for CD-4 will be in Weld County and the Eastern Plains. This is where MM is strongest. Whoever the candidate for the Democratic Party is, they must gain votes from moderate Republicans and unaffiliated on general election day. Even Democrats on the Eastern Plains have split from some of our leaders on Iraq and Immigration and they may withhold their votes depending on the CD-4 candidate, when we need a record Democratic turn-out.
It will be tougher going in 2008, not easier because MM is positioning herself well as bi-partisan, issue oriented and defender of conservatism who will check the tax and spend excesses of the Liberal Democrats who want to quit Iraq and go home – who won’t face the enemy (forget the reality of it all).
I have the background, experience, connection on issues and message that resonates with rural CD-4. I have the portfolio to credibly challenge MM on her so-called conservative values (war, size and intrusiveness of government and spending in particular). Rural voters know who I am. Over 275,000 saw my name on the ballot and read that the papers in Greeley, Sterling, Fort Morgan and Lamar endorsed me.
But in the end, if I cannot build relationships in Larimer County in particular (and Longmont), that controls the majority of delegates, or otherwise earn the impromado of the Party insiders, then Betsy or Angie who have paid their dues with the local Democratic Party in Larimer County and who have relationships with the party power structure will be the nominee.
Can they get the support needed to defeat MM in 2008 in the rural counties given their credentials and experiences? You judge.